Plug-In Road Rage: It begins

It is not the employers' responsibility, barring being a non-profit, an employers' responsibility is the bottom line profits.
Shocked? - don't be, but open your eyes to reality in the corporate world of business.
Charity begins at home, not with the employer.

DBCassidy

 

There is employer self-interest. Airlines received massive tax credits for purchases of EV baggage cart tugs, regional aircraft tugs, fuel bowser tugs, and ramp support vehicles to replace (mostly) diesel powered units.

But don't expect them to do much in the way of employees' interest. That would likely cause them (in their own special way of comp & benefits-think) to cut cash compensation by an amount equal to the "benefits" of employer-provided EV subsidy.

 

I found the comment interesting, too. This thread is about EV rage, anxiety and pecking order to charging spaces, but it's ok for a gasser to block the only diesel pump. It's been over two years since I've owned a diesel, but I still avoid gassing up around any diesel pumps and blocking someone else. Courtesy goes all the way around.

 

We're establishing a precedent. Better make it one that won't come back to bite us later.

The EPA rating system certainly has had problems with that. There's always someone not happy with the a new standard designed to help overcome old shortcomings.

It's really a challenge to make something work for everyone.

 

There are tax credits for all Airline vehicle purchases, electric or diesel. Actually there are restrictions and penalties for using diesel outside limited numbers...but these electric vehicles are very limited use and expensive commercial grade. Tugs and loaders just go back and forth on the J line or to the bag bin repeatedly with a charger only feet away. Bag tugs have more mobility, but still need repeated charging during the day. You will not find the line mechanics driving electric vehicles because their work needs unlimited mobility to keep the aircraft moving. Different vehicles for different use and these are company vehicles, not employee personal commuters.

As you pointed out secondly, free charging would be compensation to employees if they did allow free workplace charging...and even if they did allow, eventually a gasser is going to want more money because they are not getting something out of it like free gas.

It is not the responsibility or in the interest (other than PR) of the employer to provide free charging...or gas to it's employees. We are already paid.

 

One vehicle parking station, dual-fuel pump station. First come, first served.

 

As I mentioned before, single fuel pump, not dual.

 

"bedrock8x said: ↑

A diesel pump is also a gas pump. You cannot complain and call the guy gassing up an A$$. He has just the same right as you to use the pump.​

You just have to wait just like when any gas pump is occupied.​

Another new Diesel Anxiety is born.​

Diesel may share 1/2 of the pump but, the hoses are separate. Many times I, also had to put with my diesel truck waiting for a gasser to move forward so I could have access to the pump.

DBCassidy"


Like this?

 

I don't want to go down a political rathole here, but my background is in economics, so I cringe a little when there is a misunderstanding of this field.
- Firstly, when I say "it" is the employer's responsibility, I do not mean that they are the ONLY ones responsible; obviously if we are talking about doing something in the national interest, then everyone living and doing business in the country has some level of responsibility
- Secondly, I can appreciate the deferential treatment both of you have towards private employers (not surprising given their increased power in the past 30 years or so), but you are simply wrong when you try and get them off the hook.....they have responsibilities and obligations to the areas they do business in; that is why they pay local, state and federal taxes. The only real question is what those obligations are and how much should they be taxed
- Thirdly, the statement "Possible changes to money disbursements by the Government always means we as a country pay more, not less" is completely false, it does not even need disproving. It is a fairly straight forward study to determine whether or not the existing $7500 tax credit is doing more to drive adoption of EVs or whether the same amount given to employers for installing EVSEs would do more. I don't know, because I haven't done the study. But without doing it, once can't say for sure which method gives the most EV kwh bang-for-buck.

 

Nope, like this, diesel only.

 

Heh..... my diesel goes almost 1000 miles. Running-out of fuel is nary a concern. (Unlike a 3-year-old Leaf with aged battery that only goes 50 miles per charge.)

The Human Resource person just needs to look for the gas tank filler hole (the other second hole would be filled with an electirc plug). If the car has one, and HR has banned dual-power gas/electric cars from using the Chargers designated for EV-only, then the HR person would give the HR equivalent of a parking ticket.

(And a warning that the employee will be terminated if they are caught a second time violating the rules.) Sometimes sterness is the only way to go, and HR people are often the most-stern people in any company. They make the rules, the employees break the rules, and the HR people have the unhappy duty of doling-out the consequences.

 

HR has absolutely nothing to do with parking. It's neither their department nor their responsibility. Someone from maintenance or security would have to be employed to routinely perform that task, an expense unlikely an employer would be willing to accept.

 

Agreed.

 

Hmmm.... at my company it was HR that designated "these spots are for carpoolers only".

I thought the Prius and Volt and Fusion could recharge off standard 120 volt lines? All the company needs to do is run some extra outlets to the parking spaces & hang a sign "120 volt for hybrids only". That's certainly enough to top-off your hybrid. And inexpensive to install.

Meanwhile the EVs would have exclusive access to the L2 stations, because they need the higher charging speed for their 5-10 times larger battery.

(By the way I have little doubt if I said, "Hey John my Leaf is down to 20 miles, and there are no open chargers. May I have a lift to get home?" the only response I would get is taillights driving away.)

 

The HR Department should be involved if the EVSE is part of an employee perk (which is a great one, especially at certain companies).....but agreed that day-to-day operation should be under Maintenance & Security

 

Exactly. It is not the responsibility of the employer to pay for the roads their employees use to drive to work. No taxes for Big Business! No taxes for Big Business!. Yes, employees should pay the taxes for the roads they need to drive on to get to work. It is not the responsibility of the employer to pay taxes to educate its workers. They should educate themselves, privately, k-12. If the employer does anything for the community, that is not its 'responsibility'. If they pollute the environment, then the rest of us are the one responsible for paying for clean-up (W. Va). Employers are not responsible for providing electricity....employees are paid, so why don't they chip in for the monthly utility bill? Why are employees not chipping in for janitor services? They are 'paid' after all, and benefit! Why are they not paying for security and rent in the building in which they take shelter....why do they need coffee? Or a cafeteria? Please, oh please private employer, are there any other ways you wish to take money out of my pocket?

 

Big business ships goods into & out of the factory, therefore it pays millions of dollars in gas/diesel taxes to keep the roads paved. Please don't act as if they pay nothing.

I was talking about Work chargers not public chargers. (2) I don't care if hybrids charge at work, but when there are not enough chargers to accommodate everyone (and employees are sending hate emails to one another), clearly somebody has to be blocked from access (to relieve the congestion). It's just the same as California deciding "hybrids are banned from carpool lanes"..... not to be mean, but because the lanes were too crowded and so the politicians acted to relieve congestion.

If there's a scarce resource, and too many people clamoring for it, then there Has to be rationing of access. Honest opinion of end result:

HR will eventually get tired of this squabbling, or maybe accounting will say "We're spending $10,000 a month charging our employee's cars," and cancel the benefit. That's what is happening in my industry..... even our health benefits have been canceled. (The company still sells the plans, but now we are paying full price. No company assistance.) Another thing happening in my industry is the outsourcing of design, testing, and production to Indian engineers that are just as talented as us, but cost half as much. (In order to keep my engineering job, I had to take a 1/3rd cut in pay.) POINT: All this debating about chargers may soon be a moot point if the company decides the U.S. benefits need to be slashed.

 

"Possible changes to money disbursements by the Government always means we as a country pay more, not less"

On read back I conceed my statement is not completely accurate...at least the wording. I believe buyer Tax credits were/are given for hybrids and EVs to help folks buy vehicles that in the beginning were not cost effective for manufactures and buyers and were needed to help meet unyielding CARB requirements imposed by some states. These credits are always changing and most often time limited. So the suggestion that employers be given tax credits to provide facilities in effort to encourage employees to buy EV or other alternative vehicles comes up and I see the expense of said credits much higher for this to actually succeed. Let's not forget the Big Oil money and it's influence our law makers as well. Your background in Economics my help you better qualify this assumption than myself, but my base knowledge of government program disbursements tells me the costs and wastes would be much higher going to businesses of all kinds to provide "electric gas stations" for their employees...as opposed to a small portion of the population that buys EVs. The result we pay more...or should I say we be borrow more. I sincerely would love to see a study (that did not cost millions of dollars) that showed otherwise...really.

 

Earlier posters wrote, and I read, this:

"bedrock8x said: ↑
A diesel pump is also a gas pump. You cannot complain and call the guy gassing up an A$$. He has just the same right as you to use the pump. You just have to wait just like when any gas pump is occupied. Another new Diesel Anxiety is born.

Diesel may share 1/2 of the pump but, the hoses are separate. Many times I, also had to put with my diesel truck waiting for a gasser to move forward so I could have access to the pump.

DBCassidy"



Which means the image I earlier posted, not the stand-alone pump you suggested.

​

GasDieselPumpsLR.jpg

 

Yes that's correct, but the incidents I referred to happened at the type of pumps I posted and bedrock8x assumed it was the type he posted about and based his comment on how a diesel has to wait for a gasser to finish. Not all stations have the combination pumps and to block one of them when you don't have a diesel isn't right either. I never do it.